I would be very worried if this was ‘final, and now we will do it as written’ but it seems to be just another iteration.the critique is great and I just hope they listen.
I am not shocked, but i’d save disappointed for when they try to do it and noone uses it because of these reasons.
As someone who sees these articles, who should I not vote for? Is there some ranking for ‘most asshole-ish politician’ regarding the EU? I know every politician has somewhat dirt on them but I’d love to know what to avoid since apparently some of those turds are worse than others.
Someone who knows this please tell me what I am misunderstanding, though this is not related particularly to this article.
What is “gender affirming care”? When i hear that I am thinking of some racist dad who is forcing their son to go to some camp to get the gay ‘affirmed/corrected’ out of him or something along those lines.
I feel like I keep misreading the different definitions of what is meant where and why.
In general the article seems to be a summary of current legislative actions that are ongoing between big tech and EU. Though in the article it’s worded with the much more fitting ‘game of chicken between EU and Big Tech’ rather than something like the title, but I guess “drop dead has a better ring to it”…
I general the article has a lightly optimistic tone, which I very deeply hope holds true.
I really think it’s disgusting to boldly claim this is just to protect children. Then get the proposal denied with very valid reasoning that everyone’s privacy would be compromised.
And then, a few months later, they have the exact same argument again with the same proposal as before… This seems deeply disrespectful of the subject matter
It feels like a someone is trying to steal a cookie from a cookie jar, but when mum said no you just try again the exact same way…
Have you heard of e os? https://e.foundation/e-os/
De googling your android is at least a possibility, ripping apple out of ios is not possible
I know Ainz Ooal Gown when I see him…